Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
MSNBC 13
MSNBCW 13
LANGUAGE
English 30
Search Results 0 to 29 of about 30 (some duplicates have been removed)
are in for a massive and unsustainable increasing deficit if we don't get a handle on entitlements. good morning. glad to have you with us. gregg: the cbo is saying it deficit will go down to $840 billion. that's the first time it will drop a trillion dollars under president obama. martha: but with baby boomers retiring at the rate of 10,000 people a day. entitlement spending is set to explode. stuart, as we pointed out, there is a lot of enthusiasm that we won't rack up a trillion dollar deficit. >> reporter: the headline was all about the deficit is going to be below a trillion dollars. that's great news. the bad news and there is a lot of it. the next 10 years medicare will cost $1 trillion a year. obama-care subsidies will total nearly a trillion dollars. the cost of medicaid will double and the debt will go to the highest portion of tour economy than it's been in a generation. there is dismal views on the current state of the economy. 1.4% growth this year and the unemployment rate will rise at 8% and stay that way for years to come. martha: the cbo makes very clear we need to do some entitlement
. republicans are winning the battle, wouldn't you say, when it comes to balancing? over two-thirds of deficit reduction has come from cuts to domestic programs, and it's not exactly fair. but now the house progressive caucus has come out with what they call the balancing act. it's a common-sense plan to reduce the deficit by closing tax loopholes and cutting wasteful defense spending. here is the chart of the plan. there is $1.7 trillion in new revenue. the $1.7 trillion in spending cuts is still there. this looks like a much fairer chart than the current system, don't you think? and it's estimated to reduce the deficit by $3.3 trillion. remember, we're trying to hit $4 trillion. so we're getting closer. the plan ends tax loopholes for yachts and for jets. it reduces the corporate meal and entertainment deduction to 25%. you can't write off the whole dinner anymore. it ends fossil fuel subsidies for oil companies that are raking in massive profits. exxonmobil, you know what their profit was? $44 billion in 2012. the last thing they need right now is your tax dollars as subsidy. the balancing
that john boehner said about how we have handled deficits over the years. let's listen to this. >> at some point, washington has to deal with its spending problem. now, i've watched them kick this can down the road 22 years that i've been here. i've had enough of it. it's time to act. >> that is -- i'm trying to think of a word other than lie. kick the can down the road? we had a big tax increase in 1993 with president clinton along with big spending cuts. >> right. >> it was a deficit reduction package that worked. they continued to do more deficit reducing package with newt gingrich on the spending side throughout the decade and we're on our way to a surplus. >> that's right. i've been calling it the undecade, the 1990s has been written out of their record. they would have you believe that it was always the way it was under reagan and then bush. >> why don't they just say, leave off the clinton tax increase, which helped a lot, and just claim they did it for spending cuts? >> because if they do, if they admit that something nice happened in the '90s, they have to say, what happened after
. >> they need to make cost-cutting measures. i mean, they've been running in the deficit for quite a while. >> you know, those folks look like just hard-working knowledgeable americans that care about the country. but they're so wrong. it's not about e-mails and it's not about ecommerce. it's about the republican party destroying the middle class in this country. and i wonder how many of those folks right there who don't rely on the post office, how they're going to feel when their netflix deliveries are delayed. what? they're not here for saturday night family movies? that's right. people definitely take the post office for granted. most everything americans know about the post office is absolutely wrong. they haven't paid attention to the story. and into the mainstream media, here we go. this morning, the "washington post" is telling people that the post office suffered tens of billions of dollars in losses in recent years with the advent of the internet and ecommerce. really? plenty of other media outlets. well, they are taking their information directly from the republican talking poin
we're going to get these defense cuts and deficit hawks, conservatives, tea partiers are putting moderate republicans in a bind saying this is cutting our deficit. let's go for it. >> the grand irony, of course, is the fact that the number -- if you poll people their number one issue is jobs, right? it continues to be jobs. and $120 billion austerity crunch, the numbers being bantered around, in exchange for the sequester, which is like $85 billion. whatever it is, right, that's a big chunk. that will have an effect, negative jobs effect, no question. >> it is going to have an effect, i agree with you, chris. here is what i think. i think it is a risk. there will probably be a small recession. we had a .1 decrease in gdp last time. this deficit is a real problem. this is where i depart from paul. who am i to depart from paul? a nobel laureate. >> we'll ask him. >> this is about the best deal we'll get out of the right-winged crazy people in the house. >> because it's balanced and -- >> it doesn't really touch -- there's no better deal progressives are going to get out of this oth
, there are good points. for instance, deficits are decreasing. however, all i ever hear from republicans is the president needs to get serious. from speaker john boehner. that's the best impersonation i can give you. >> it's not bad. >> wasn't very good, nothing personal. >> but dana, is that it? >> well, that was a little raspy, your john boehner. but i think you've captured the sentiment, more or less correctly. and yes, the cbo report shows that the deficit is shrinking. but it is also showing the efforts to shrink the deficit have taken away from growth and the economy. you can't have one of these things without the other. now, i think there's a fallacy in the first question you posed to jared. that is that republicans would be very upset if there were a double-dip recession in a political sense as rush limbaugh and others have stated, they may be in a stronger position if the economy goes back into recession. then the president and his majority party will be less powerful. so they actually have a political incentive. >> hang on a second, dana. you're saying something that's troublin
talking about the deficit. >> really? oh, yes. eric cantor to the rescue. he is ready to save the republican image and put a stop to the electoral college losses, right? of course, this is not the first time eric cantor has tried to save the party. you see, it actually is the fourth attempt that he has had. in 2009, cantor held a pizza party, remember that? with jeb bush and mitt romney by launching the national council for a new america that didn't work. a year later, cantor was back at it. he was one of the young guns ready to take the republican party by storm. >> there is a better way, and a new team is ready to bring america back. eric cantor, kevin mccarthy, paul ryan joined by common-sense conservative candidates from across the country. together, they are ready to make history. together they are the young guns. >> the good old days. in 2011, cantor launched the you cut program. he wanted to get the public to vote on weekly cuts to federal government. another year, another failure. so today cantor launched the "making life work" campaign. he is trying desperately to avo
appropriations committee yesterday we learned that we're actually making progress in getting the budget deficit to shrink below a trillion dollars. which you have saluted as good news. >> you know, a lot of people forget what president bill clinton did. if we would have just continued what he did back when he left office, we would have been -- we had a surplus. we wouldn't be in this situation. but bottom line is the deficit is i believe it is the lowest in some time in 2008. we ought to be celebrating we're actually moving the target down. it is moving down instead of going up. but nobody has picked up. i'm glad she picked that up. bill and victoria, thank you for telling the listeners that president obama and all of us working together, we're actually bringing down the deficit. >> bill: the deficit's going down and the market the dow is going up. so there is some good economic news that you never hear about except here on the "full court press." congressman henry cuellar great to have you with us this morning. >> thank you, bill and victoria. >> bill: we'll be back to continue our conversatio
this regarding eric cantor, who is giving a much-hyped speech regarding the deficit and towards a broader and more inclusive role they can play. he says mr. cantor can apply the existing gop policies. so that, i think at this point in time is a great question for the republican party at least right now. can their response to the 2012 election be to just change the tenor and temperature of their approach to politics rather than the actually policies. can they just stop primarying guys like dick luger without changing the approach to say, inequality. that is the message, changing your hope is different than changing your policies. it is great to have you both here, thank you for joining us. >> great to be here. >> molly, so can they? do they need to do more, need to sort of go back and look at policies or can you actually get pretty far just by changing the way your party acts in public? >> i think the answer is yes. they have to do both. and first of all the republicans find themselves in a situation that the democrats found themselves in maybe a decade ago, where they are on the wrong sid
away. right? >> right. >> but republicans got to the brink and caved on the deficit ceiling. they got to the brink and they caved on sequester the first round. now, sequester comes back and still with the budget. and and they are saying, no, no, no. they are saying again that we are never going to agree with this unless we get major, major spending cuts and social security and welfare but can we believe him anymore? i mean it looks to me at the same time like they will get to the brink again and realize, no, no, no. we can't do this. if we look at recent history, that would be the course. what's fascinating is the republicans see this as the major bargaining chip to get their desired spending cuts but if we remember from their campaign last fall we saw mitt romney and paul rind on trying to avert the sequester saying this would be a really bad thing, you know, especially for defense. now, we kind of see a reverse here john boehner has said that he does not support a delay which the president wants, which the president outlined last week. so t
Search Results 0 to 29 of about 30 (some duplicates have been removed)